NHL could split media rights in next deal

[GKJ]

ESPN is the most overrated brand & is getting hammered in ratings as well as operating losses. The NHL has been doing fine without it. Crosby was never going to be a serious mainstream attraction because that is how hockey has always operated....at least in the US. And using your logic, how does moving from being the #1 property at NBCSN to tied to whatever in a crowded field at ESPN help the NHL's position? It would fall behind college football, basketball, etc. The NHL is not on the verge of insolvency either. More & more people are cutting the cable cord, so if those trends continue, ESPN might not even be a factor going forward.

The NHL is behind college football and basketball right now being on their own network and essentially unopposed. ESPN+ is something of interest. But the biggest thing is that live sports rights fees are through the roof. ESPN is overrated when it comes to quality, but not when it comes to attracting and drawing attention to the lowest common denominator.

 

[snovalleyhockeyfan]

???

FS1 is in more homes than NBCSN (84,486,000 vs 81,578,000)

Exactly. And if it's not in a particular market, that's again additional leverage for Fox to get carriage on the local cable system. I mean, look, you have a little of that same problem now I think with NBCSN, don't you?

 

[masa2009]

I think it's important for the NHL, which struggles with its national media footprint, to include several groups in their rights deal. Aligning with several media companies instead of just one might give an incentive to more players in the media landscape to talk about it a little more.
A lot of people are saying that ESPN didn't talk about hockey anyway when they had it. Sure but the NHL was in a lull back then, with no young stars, dull play and downbeat headlines.
I think things like the subsequent Ovi-Crosby rivalry, which was one of hockey's more digestible storylines for the casual sports fan, could have been a bit more part of the national sports conversation if the NHL had not put all its eggs in the Comcast basket.

 

[LeftWingLocked]

The NHL is the only sport where the Finals are on two different stations. That is so Mickey Mouse. Either air all the finals on NBCSN or NBC, stop with the going back and forth nonsense.

 

[rojac]

The NHL is the only sport where the Finals are on two different stations. That is so Mickey Mouse. Either air all the finals on NBCSN or NBC, stop with the going back and forth nonsense.

My understanding is that NBC wanted that to help increase the subscriber base for NBCSN. But I wouldn't be surprised if that was something that the NHL would like changed if they re-up with NBC.

 

[awfulwaffle]

Yes, but it would be a good vehicle for Fox to get it into more homes and those games wouldn't be the main weekly games anyway. Your Wednesday and weekend games would be Fox or FS1. It'd be sort of similar to ESPN when they launched ESPN2 with loads of NHL games. ESPN2 didn't launch to too many homes at that time either and did the league care? Not really, did they?

To add to my point, here's what a Fox exclusive (again if they got everything as opposed to splitting it with NBC) could look like:

-Monday and Thursday or Friday single games on FS2 with all games co-existing with the participating teams' RSN broadcasts so as to counter the issues with lack of national distribution of the network.

-Wednesday and weekend games on Fox and/or FS1 with those being full national exclusives.

That doesn't make any sense using FS2. NBCSN already airs games on the days you are talking about and reaches much more households. You want to expand hockey coverage and viewers, not limit the options.

 

[48g90a138pts]

Whichever gets the NHL the most money. This past season the NBA hauled in 2.6bil from their TV deal. NHL has to get a huge raise from the 200mil they're currently getting. A bump to 400-600 mil a year doesn't cut it for me. NBC got such a amazing deal signing for 20 years that the tail end of this expiring contract is a joke. I know Bettman was looking for stability for the NHL at the time but wow what a sacrifice.

Half of what the NBA is pulling in for the NHL is a stretch, but some sort of bar has to be set.

 

[edog37]

The NHL is behind college football and basketball right now being on their own network and essentially unopposed. ESPN+ is something of interest. But the biggest thing is that live sports rights fees are through the roof. ESPN is overrated when it comes to quality, but not when it comes to attracting and drawing attention to the lowest common denominator.

There is a huge assumption being made here. People assume ESPN would suddenly care about hockey enough to give it increased visibility just because they started to air games. Given the crowded field in ESPN's rose patch, that logic does not necessarily follow. ESPN had hockey before so we have a track record on how it would be treated. Unless there is a solid case to be made that moving to ESPN would benefit the league & backed up by data, then I would be hesitant to support it as would most NHL executives. Yes, the league can be very myopic at times, but those guys aren't the idiots they are portrayed to be on this page either. When you switch TV contracts (or if you even consider it), there is a lot going into the decision.

 

[Dirty Old Man]

And that might be a hockey thing, but it might also be an NBC thing: It's a company afraid to commit to anything other than the most milquetoast, inoffensive people (see: a million years of Jay Leno, Jimmy Fallon, their never-ending recycling of mediocre SNL personalities).

On the other hand, I can't stand anyone on ESPN or Fox, so....?

 

[Rich Nixon]

There is a huge assumption being made here. People assume ESPN would suddenly care about hockey enough to give it increased visibility just because they started to air games.

That's not at all an assumption. ESPN is a company that is built to make money. It does so by buying the rights to broadcast sporting events and then selling advertising during said sporting events, and building blocks of content related to those sports events that also contain advertising. ESPN isn't going to spend literally billions of dollars on NHL rights and then not try to push it. Assuming anything otherwise is absolutely insane.

On the other hand, I can't stand anyone on ESPN or Fox, so....?

Right, but I sort of addressed that...there's good personalities on the other networks, just hidden behind the clowns. And I'd rather have some clowns I could laugh at than have to hear Keith Jones try to present the handful of braindead postgame interview cliches he learned two decades ago between every period as "analysis."

 

[powerstuck]

a) I'm glad I live in Canada.

We're getting whole playoffs for free on CBC and they probably have the best crew working the games.

b) I wonder if the possibility of this is because NBC (or anyone else) does not want to pay the price NHL is looking for.

You pay extra for exclusivity, so the league will definitely leave money on the table going with more than one broadcaster, but maybe they cannot find a single one to pay the whole price.

 

[tony d]

ESPN and Fox would make sense together as equal partners in something like this.

 

[eddygee]

a) I'm glad I live in Canada.
We're getting whole playoffs for free on CBC and they probably have the best crew working the games.

b) I wonder if the possibility of this is because NBC (or anyone else) does not want to pay the price NHL is looking for.

You pay extra for exclusivity, so the league will definitely leave money on the table going with more than one broadcaster, but maybe they cannot find a single one to pay the whole price.

I stated this logic way back during the playoffs last season on exclusivity during the NBC/NHL rift during the Stanley Cup. I thought this may be at hand too with NBC possibly scoffing at a number where NHL says we want $700 mil yr or something and NBC was thinking something like $450-550mil yr. In that case it's hard for NBC to go from a price of that for a exclusive package to only getting half the games. The natural inclination for them would be to say ok and half the offer. Now if NHL can show that they can get that much from another network or two and that they really don't need NBC then we'd be in the drivers seat and NBC would probably end up paying a higher premium either to keep their exclusive deal or pay to just have a piece of the pie. NHL could be helped because FOX and ESPN have been known to collude to keep sports products off of NBC/Comcast in the past.

Going with multiple broadcasters really only works..

1. When you can drive a premium with any network so obviously having more is better (NFL, NBA).

2. When you can't really get a premium package deal with enough revenue from a exclusive deal so piece mealing it and getting revenue from here and there is the best alternative. NHL is kinda in the middle IMHO if they can get 2 additional networks to pay $250-300 mil each without having exclusive rights and fully knowing they won't get the more lucrative part of the TV rights the Stanley Cup Finals and only a select number of playoff games then Bettman deserves a ticker-tape.

 

[NextBigThing]

If ESPN pays big money for the NHL, then they will pimp it out and make it cool again similar to what they did with the NBA. I'd love to see Stephen A. Smith and Max Kellerman debate McDavid, Crosby, Marchand's antics, Leafs, etc. Bettman should do everything possible to make sure ESPN gets at least a portion of the NHL.

 

[qwerty]

The NHL needs to branch out. They need all the networks to have some skin in the game. To be completely ignored by ESPN is just a bad idea. Even if they don’t they get the best offer, it’s smarter to take a little less then to give full exclusivity to just one network.

The NHL should receive quite an offer if a bidding war ensues. That could send salaries sky rocketing.

 

[powerstuck]

I stated this logic way back during the playoffs last season on exclusivity during the NBC/NHL rift during the Stanley Cup. I thought this may be at hand too with NBC possibly scoffing at a number where NHL says we want $700 mil yr or something and NBC was thinking something like $450-550mil yr. In that case it's hard for NBC to go from a price of that for a exclusive package to only getting half the games. The natural inclination for them would be to say ok and half the offer. Now if NHL can show that they can get that much from another network or two and that they really don't need NBC then we'd be in the drivers seat and NBC would probably end up paying a higher premium either to keep their exclusive deal or pay to just have a piece of the pie. NHL could be helped because FOX and ESPN have been know to collude to keep sports products off of NBC/Comcast in the past.

Going with multiple broadcasters really on works

1. When you can drive a premium with any network so obviously having more is better (NFL, NBA).

2. When you can't really get a premium package deal with enough revenue from a exclusive deal so piece mealing it and getting revenue from here and there is the best alternative. NHL is kinda in the middle IMHO if they can get 2 additional networks to pay $250-300 mil each without having exclusive rights and fully knowing they won't get the more lucrative part of the TV rights the Stanley Cup Finals and only a select number of playoff games then Bettman deserves a ticker-tape.

And the weird thing is, NHL's current TV contract is SO LOW compared to other sports that whatever happens, people will see it as NHL scored big.

But we all know deep down in their best dreams NHL would like to match NBA tv contract wise. I don't see them doing it.

 

[powerstuck]

The NHL needs to branch out. They need all the networks to have some skin in the game. To be completely ignored by ESPN is just a bad idea. Even if they don’t they get the best offer, it’s smarter to take a little less then to give full exclusivity to just one network.

The NHL should receive quite an offer if a bidding war ensues. That could send salaries sky rocketing.

Not so sure. NHL wants the most money they can get.

Bell trying playing the ''we are long term partners so I should get a discount'' and Rogers ended up winning the Canadian TV network. Even today I doubt tho that network will be profitable for them.

I guess we will see how NBC stars this all, but they are in a 15+ years relationship and once again comparing with Canada...fans didn't really appreciate the change.

 

[edog37]

That's not at all an assumption. ESPN is a company that is built to make money. It does so by buying the rights to broadcast sporting events and then selling advertising during said sporting events, and building blocks of content related to those sports events that also contain advertising. ESPN isn't going to spend literally billions of dollars on NHL rights and then not try to push it. Assuming anything otherwise is absolutely insane.

Look at how they treated the league before. They aren’t going to pay top dollar for the NHL. They’ll put a bid out there touting their footprint & it’ll be less than NBC. If the league bites, they’ll get treated as second class citizens.

 

[Rich Nixon]

Look at how they treated the league before. They aren’t going to pay top dollar for the NHL. They’ll put a bid out there touting their footprint & it’ll be less than NBC. If the league bites, they’ll get treated as second class citizens.

...you’re off here. They did have a dedicated show on ESPN(2) for hockey, they got their highlights, they had their ads. Not as much as we’d have liked, but the coverage now is 0 over there. So acting like that wouldn’t change is insane.

Plus, we don’t know what the financials are gonna look like at all. The NHL isn’t going to leave tons of money on the table for the hell of it. Would they scrape a bit off optimistically looking for increased reach? Maybe. But it’s not like the league is just gonna bend over for a brand. They already eschewed all other networks to go with an unconventional single network arrangement that paid them a ton of cash. Revenues have risen dramatically. If there’s ESPN on the table it’s because they made a good bid.

 

[edog37]

...you’re off here. They did have a dedicated show on ESPN(2) for hockey, they got their highlights, they had their ads. Not as much as we’d have liked, but the coverage now is 0 over there. So acting like that wouldn’t change is insane.

Plus, we don’t know what the financials are gonna look like at all. The NHL isn’t going to leave tons of money on the table for the hell of it. Would they scrape a bit off optimistically looking for increased reach? Maybe. But it’s not like the league is just gonna bend over for a brand. They already eschewed all other networks to go with an unconventional single network arrangement that paid them a ton of cash. Revenues have risen dramatically. If there’s ESPN on the table it’s because they made a good bid.

We shall see...

 

[eddygee]

And the weird thing is, NHL's current TV contract is SO LOW compared to other sports that whatever happens, people will see it as NHL scored big.

But we all know deep down in their best dreams NHL would like to match NBA tv contract wise. I don't see them doing it.

Exactly someone mentioned they wouldn't be happy with a deal between $400-600m yr but that's 2-3x increase. You can see the headlines signow. "NHL signs landmark US TV deals that triples previous rights deal.

NHL missed the boat on the massive rights increases that occurred the last 5 yrs. The only way I think we can make up and try to catch up with the big 3 TV deals to try to crack that US $1 bil yr would be to sign a short term 5-6yr deal with multiple networks.

 

[DaBadGuy7]

Seeing the overnight rating for Game 7 of the SCF, I am more confident that a split TV deal is coming of some form. FOX has been aggressive in getting more sports properties and now with “New FOX” initiative focused on live content, NHL would be perfect content to have for FS1/FOX during the spring/early summer. Turner under WarnerMedia just acquired the Champions League and has new AEW wrestling promotion, I think giving TBS another sport besides MLB might be a fit there. I think 600 million is a possibility, I don’t think they get 1 billion a year, but they definitely sizable increase from 200 million imo.

 

[Blackhawkswincup]

If ESPN pays big money for the NHL, then they will pimp it out and make it cool again similar to what they did with the NBA. I'd love to see Stephen A. Smith and Max Kellerman debate McDavid, Crosby, Marchand's antics, Leafs, etc. Bettman should do everything possible to make sure ESPN gets at least a portion of the NHL.

ESPN is shit and when they had NHL they treated it like shit and have done everything to ignore NHL for last 15 years

Also last time TV rights were up for grabs ESPN interest was about putting NHL on its lower networks and essentially bury it

ESPN is last thing a hockey fan should want at this point given past attitudes at ESPN and fact they will gleefully bury NHL games to hold 24/7 coverage of Tim Tebow minor league baseball or nonsense specials for next NBA FA

 

[Groo]

If ESPN pays big money for the NHL, then they will pimp it out and make it cool again similar to what they did with the NBA. I'd love to see Stephen A. Smith and Max Kellerman debate McDavid, Crosby, Marchand's antics, Leafs, etc. Bettman should do everything possible to make sure ESPN gets at least a portion of the NHL.

Not sure if serious

 

[BKIslandersFan]

Not sure if serious

I mean, if they do get the rights I can see them pushing NHL more. It’s not gonna be Stephen A talking hockey more but they will do something else to sell more.